GR 219637; (April, 2023) (Digest)
G.R. No. 219637 . April 26, 2023
ANSELMO P. BULANON, PETITIONER, VS. MENDCO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION / PINACLE CASTING AND/OR MASTERCRAFT PHILIPPINES, INC., AND/OR JACQUER INTERNATIONAL AND/OR ERIC NG MENDOZA, RESPONDENTS.
FACTS
Petitioner Anselmo Bulanon alleged he was hired as a Welder/Fabricator in the furniture business of respondent Eric Ng Mendoza, who owned several companies. He filed a complaint with the DOLE for non-payment of various benefits. After a DOLE inspection found violations, petitioner reported for work but was allegedly given his salary and told not to return, and was later prevented from entering the premises. This prompted him to file complaints for illegal dismissal before the NLRC. Respondents denied petitioner was their employee, claiming his services were engaged on a task basis for masonry work in their personal residences. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of petitioner, declaring respondents’ Position Paper invalid for lacking a proper Verification and Certification of Non-Forum Shopping, and thus deemed petitioner’s allegations admitted. The NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter, finding no employer-employee relationship and dismissing the complaint. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC’s decision.
ISSUE
Whether petitioner was able to prove by substantial evidence the existence of an employer-employee relationship between him and the respondents.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the CA decision. The Court held that petitioner failed to substantiate his claim of being a regular employee. The rules on verification and certification against forum shopping, while mandatory, may be relaxed to serve substantial justice, as rigid application would be unjust given the lack of evidence proving employment. The NLRC correctly considered the evidence on appeal. Proceedings before labor tribunals are non-litigious, and technicalities may be set aside. The evidence, including payroll records and affidavits from other workers, showed petitioner was not listed as an employee, worked irregularly, and was akin to an independent contractor or “maintenance man” performing odd jobs for various parties, not under the control of respondents. Thus, no employer-employee relationship was established.